Subject: [Disman] Regarding the draft submission on the Object definition for the history collection

From: "Shailaja Yadawad" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:56:14 -0700

Hi All,
 
We have prepared a draft on object definition for history collection of
Data( ASN.1 integer based) and want to submit the same to "WG" for
review.
 
The proposed object definition has  similarity to the user history
group of the RMON2(RFC2021) but draft proposal is not intending the
extension of the user history group but instead proposes a stand alone
MIB definition. 
 
The question that I have is, do we submit such a draft  in this WG
(Disman) or Rmonmib WG ?. 
At the end of this mail I have appended a introduction part of our
draft.
 
Regards,
Shailaja.

Draft Introduction
__________________________________________________________
 
Object definition for history collection is a difficult task for a
number of reasons.
Firstly, object definition must allow the user to specify any 
Data(an ASN.1 INTEGER based object) for history collection. Secondly,
the object 
definition should allow the user to configure and control history
collection with 
one configuration settings for the entire columnar object. Also the
object definition 
should provide selection of one or more instances for the history
collection of the 
given columnar Data. As the need for alarm generation forms a part of
monitoring 
the user requires a object definition provision for configuring the
alarm generation 
as well.
 
Some of these above mentioned challenges, such as user specific history

collection and alarm generation is being addressed by the IETF working
group, 
Remote Network Monitoring,rmonmib. As there are several challenges the
user
faces while configuring for the monitoring using the available standard
object 
definitions, the user needs detailed configuration and control of the
history 
collection. This document proposes the object definition for a
sophisticated 
and easy form for configuration and control of history collection. 
____________________________________________________________

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:26:41 +0100

>>>>> Shailaja Yadawad writes:

Shailaja> We have prepared a draft on object definition for history
Shailaja> collection of Data( ASN.1 integer based) and want to submit
Shailaja> the same to "WG" for review.

[...]
 
Shailaja> The question that I have is, do we submit such a draft in
Shailaja> this WG (Disman) or Rmonmib WG ?.  At the end of this mail I
Shailaja> have appended a introduction part of our draft.
 
The normal way is to submit an individual draft first. People can then
read it and after that, the WGs in question can decide whether this
should become a working group work item.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:26:41 +0100

[...]

/js